Dear Ojeda Penn,
You said once that jazz is an expression of true democracy, for, as Barkley summarizes “each member has to listen to what the other is doing and know how to respond while each is, at the same time, intent upon her own improvisation....each person is allowed, in fact required, to be an individual, to go her or his own way, and yet to do so in concert with the group.” I think you’ve made a beautiful analogy for what the future of feminism should be like.
The concept of intersectionality is certainly important––for too long have white feminists dominated the conversation of women’s rights, either co-opting or completely ignoring the unique discrimination that women of color face––however I have an issue with the current execution of intersectionality. This issue was presented by Barkley: firstly that our discussions of intersectionality seem to only focus on the ways in which white women, with their immense privilege, are negatively impacting the lives of women of color. While this is certainly true, its one sidedness removes the agency of women of color, and ignores the ways in which white women are impacted by women of color. We must recognize that differences in social status and economic standing are because women of color, for too long, have born the brunt of the menial labor and childcare, which in turn freed white women and allowed them to work their way up into the upper echelons of previously white-male dominated fields, leaving their sisters behind. Secondly, a resulting effect from the first point, is that the discussion of intersectionality focuses to closely on the differences between women. This is problematic, because it implies that the differences between white women and women of color are inherent, when really they are not; they are the result of a long, toxic and oppressive relationship that must change.
What I think is so great about your jazz analogy is that it points out exactly what is currently wrong with our discussions of intersectionality, and provides an alternative. Currently, the feminist movement is an exclusive and insular orchestra. A WOC voice must conform to the western, white, feminist tradition in order to be heard. The alternative would be playing jazz, where, like you said, everyone is individual (and different from one another), but in order to make this music we must also listen to one another, make the discussion more relational. And the first step (for white women) is to step back and make room. We cannot be silent, for in the face of sexism, I think women never should be. We must acknowledge our history of white feminism and our own racist tendencies. We must recognize how much harder women of color have had it in america, and let those melodies of struggle and triumph surge above. This means accepting that our white-feminist-orchestra will have to get used to making another kind of music, namely jazz: a music form that, interestingly enough, actually resulted from combining african rhythms with western harmony in the beginning of the 20th century.
The concept of intersectionality is certainly important––for too long have white feminists dominated the conversation of women’s rights, either co-opting or completely ignoring the unique discrimination that women of color face––however I have an issue with the current execution of intersectionality. This issue was presented by Barkley: firstly that our discussions of intersectionality seem to only focus on the ways in which white women, with their immense privilege, are negatively impacting the lives of women of color. While this is certainly true, its one sidedness removes the agency of women of color, and ignores the ways in which white women are impacted by women of color. We must recognize that differences in social status and economic standing are because women of color, for too long, have born the brunt of the menial labor and childcare, which in turn freed white women and allowed them to work their way up into the upper echelons of previously white-male dominated fields, leaving their sisters behind. Secondly, a resulting effect from the first point, is that the discussion of intersectionality focuses to closely on the differences between women. This is problematic, because it implies that the differences between white women and women of color are inherent, when really they are not; they are the result of a long, toxic and oppressive relationship that must change.
What I think is so great about your jazz analogy is that it points out exactly what is currently wrong with our discussions of intersectionality, and provides an alternative. Currently, the feminist movement is an exclusive and insular orchestra. A WOC voice must conform to the western, white, feminist tradition in order to be heard. The alternative would be playing jazz, where, like you said, everyone is individual (and different from one another), but in order to make this music we must also listen to one another, make the discussion more relational. And the first step (for white women) is to step back and make room. We cannot be silent, for in the face of sexism, I think women never should be. We must acknowledge our history of white feminism and our own racist tendencies. We must recognize how much harder women of color have had it in america, and let those melodies of struggle and triumph surge above. This means accepting that our white-feminist-orchestra will have to get used to making another kind of music, namely jazz: a music form that, interestingly enough, actually resulted from combining african rhythms with western harmony in the beginning of the 20th century.
No comments:
Post a Comment